

















'^^*\'v'^ ^^.''''f,.***J^ '\.'*^v^\a'^ '^^J*'"-**^^^ 

is«". *-.../ /J(fe\ *-..*^ .-i^^-^ -V/ /Jfev * 



^^ f\ »^ • • • > *^ 






TIIK CONSTITUTION: 

ORIGINATING IN COMPROMISK, IT CAN ONLY UK PRKSKRVKI) 
BY ADHHRIN(J TO ITS SPIRIT, AND OBSKRVINO 

ITS KVKl;V OHr.H; \TiON. 



AN ADDRESS 



DBI.IV8RRD BY 



JAMES W. WALL, ESQ., 

AT THE CITY HALL, 15L'RLIN(iT()N. 
FEBRUARY 20, 1862, 

BY INVITATION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OK THE ( ITY. 



PHILADELPHIA: 
KlSii \: IJAIIiD. PRINTEIIS. COl SANSOM STKKKT 
j^. 18 6 2. 



^^^^>^— ^^^ ^^»^pw p^^>>i«^^p»w ^*^^^^^p^^i^^^^ 



■^^^^^^^^^"^•^■^^^^P*"^^^^^ 



THE CONSTITUTION: 

ORIGINATING IN COMPROMISK, IT CAN ONLY BE PRESERVEU 
BY ADHERING TO ITS SPIRIT, AND OBSERVING -* 

ITS EVERY OBLIGATION. 



AN ADDRESS 



DELIVEBED BY 



JAMES AV. WALL, ESQ., 

AT THE CITY HALL, BURLINGTON, 
FEBRUARY 20, 1862, 

BY INVITATION OF TUE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY. 



PHILADELPHIA: 

KING & BAIRD, PRINTERS, 607 SANSOM STREET. 

1862. 



^ 



^ 



t^\ 



A 



> 



6 



6 1 SOS 

»05 






CORRESPONDENCE 



Jambs W. Wali,, Esq. 

Dear Sir. — The undersigned listened witli great pleasure and satisfac- 
tion to your able, eloquent and patriotic Address, delivered by request 
of the Common Council, to the citizens of Burlington, on Thursday 
evening, the 20th instant, and believe that a more extended knowledge 
of the History of the Constitution of the United States, and the com- 
promises then necessarily made by its framers, during its formation 
and its subsequent adoption, would aid greatly in impressing upon the 
minds of the community, the true value of so priceless a heritage. 

We, therefore, in behalf of a large number^of xoui; f.-llow citizens, 
request a copy for publication, indulging the hope, tliat all into whose 
hands it may hereafter fall, will more earnestly^termine that the Con- 
stitution, transmitted to us by our fathers, shall be perpetuated, and its 
principles strictly maintained. 

B. F. Lk.vvexs, Jos. Jouxso.v, 

Fkasklin Gauxtt, Joel R. James, 

Jos. L. Wkiout, Natu'l W. Feximoke, 

Chas. Lippincott, Chaltncey T. Booth, 

Lewis C. Leeds, George Wetherill, 

JoxATHAX Knight, Henry Hollembaek. 

Burlington, Feb. 21, 1S62. 



Burlinrjton, F-h. 21, 1SG2. 
Gentlemen : — 

gives me much pleasure to comply with your request to furnish a 
copy of my Address, for publication. These are truly times wheu the 
attention of the citizen should be fixed upon the Constitution. The 
safety and happiness of our beloved country, and a successful issue to 
the fearful struggle now going on, depend upon its faithful preservation. 

Yours, truly, 

JAMKS W. WALL. 

To Messrs. Leavens, Gaustt, Wuigut, et al., Committee. 



THE CONSTITUTION AS IT IS. 



THE 



FREEMAN'S BEST INHERITAXCE, 



THE BASIS OF OUR 



LAWS AND LIBERTIES. 



"Major hereditas veuit unicuiiiue nostrum a jure et legibus qnam a 
parentibus . ' ' — Cicero. 

"A greater inlieritance comes to each of us from our rights and laws, 
than from our parents." 



ADDRESS. 



It may not be generally known, that to the State 
of New Jersey belongs the high honor of having 
originated the plan which, nltimately, resulted in the 
Convention that framed the present Constitution of 
the United States. The circular letter of Virginia, 
that assembled only the representatives of six States 
at Annapolis, was simply a call "/or the jnirpose of 
adopting some umfomi system in their commercial reh- 
tions." 

New Jersey was the only State whose representa- 
tives were authorised to consider ^^ how far an uniform 
Sf/stem in their commercial relations^ and other important 
matters^ might he necessarg to the common interest and 
permanent harmony of the several States ; and to report 
such an act on the suhject, as^ when ratified hy them, 
tvoidd enahle the United States to provide for the exigen- 
cies of the TlnionP 

The Convention at Annapolis, not finding scope 
enough, under the instructions given to the delegates, 
to enable it to effect any general alteration of the 
Articles of Confederation, in conformity with a report 
made by a committee of their body, united in a 
recommendation to the several States to call a Con- 
vention for the purpose of a general revision of the 
Articles of Confederation : and it is a significant fact, 
that in this lleport, special mention is made of tlie 



8 

character of the instructions and powers given to the 
deputies from New Jersey, as an improvement on the 
original plan, and deserving of incorporation into 
that of a future Convention." 

The Congress of the Confederation having sanc- 
tioned the recommendation of the Convention at 
Annapolis, Virginia, as usual, leading the way, the 
other States, with the exception of Rhode Island, 
appointed their delegates, who assembled on the 
second Monday of May, 1787, in sufficient numbers 
to form a quorum, at the old State House, in Phila- 
delphia. It was a locahty already sacred in the 
memory of the ardent patriots of the young republic. 
Within its time-honored walls the great charter of 
our freedom had first been read, the tones of its 
ancient bell had sounded the first joyful notes that 
proclaimed our independence ; and its triumphant 
music had been caught up, and borne along, until 
the ears of the whole nation were filled with the 
sound thereof; and with old John Adams, through all 
the gloom of the present, " they thought they could see 
the rays of the ravishing light and glory of the 
future." 

Never before, in the world's history, was such a 
body of men assembled in grave council — so con- 
spicuous for lofty virtue, transcendent talent, and 
self-sacrificing, devoted patriotism. What an illus- 
trious roll of names it presents — all, men who, in the 
Involution just successfully accomplished, had, either 
in the field, the forum or the cabinet, given most 
exalted instances of rare ability, stern integrity, and 
love for the common weal! They had come forth 
triumphantly out of that revolution, upon whose 



dangerous and uncertain issue they had been content 
to stake everything that men hold most dear, liaving 
pledged for its accomplisliment, " their lircs, llicir j'i>r- 
tuticx, and their sucrcd honorxy In such a desperate 
struggle as they had just passed through victoriously, 
how could it have been otherwise, but that all the 
noblest instincts of their nature should have been 
developed, their faculties sharpened, their judgments 
strengthened, their experience enlarged, and their 
political views liberalized { It was, in trutli, the 
stern discipline to which they had been subjected, 
that had, day by day, educated them up to their 
great work. The muscle had been developed, the 
sinews had been strengthened, that gave them power 
to wrestle with every difficulty, and to remove every 
obstacle from their pathway. That great Superin- 
tending Power, who watches over Nations, guides 
and controls revolutions, who makes " the wrath of 
man to praise Him," and gathers from the field of 
havoc harvests of human welfare, had unquestionably 
made these men for their great work. He had 
brought them through the fiery trials of the battle- 
field unscathed. He had saved them from the ruth- 
less hands of the executioners of the King. He had 
spared them amid all the chances and changes of the 
troublous times upon which they had been tost, that 
they might convene there in council when the storm 
was o'erpast, and lay the foundations u[)on which the 
fabric of a great Nation was to be upreared. 

It is true, and pity 'tis 'tis true, that it docs 
appear now to our limited and clouded vision, as if 
the labors of these great builders had been in vain. 
Overweening pride, daring insubordination, insane 



10 

self-confidence, political corruption, a wild, devilish 
fanaticism, have usurped the seats of the old time 
humility, that child-like dependence upon God, that 
scrupulous honesty, that high-toned conservatism, so. 
strikingly characterizing the meu of the revolutionary 
era. The sectionalism and pharasaical self-sufficiency, 
that thanks God " it is not as this publican," were 
unknown to the men of that early day. Individual 
as well as social strength have been imperilled by 
these corruptions, until at last, the very fabric, reared 
by our fathers, and for which they sacrificed so much, 
has been most terribly shaken, — and might I not say, 
with Queen Elinor, in King John, 

"This might have been prevented, and made whole 
"With very easy arguments of love, 
Which now the manage of two kingdoms must 
With fearful bloody issue arbitrate. 

But I still have confidence in the future, and in that 
Power to whom the future is as well known as the 
past. I cannot, will not believe that this noble 
structure, reared with so much toil, so many sacri- 
fices, sanctified by so many prayers, and with such 
evident marks of the interposition of a Higher 
Power in the work, was simply destined 

" To adorn a moral, or to point a tale." 

Paine, writing to Washington, in 1796, says, "A 
thousand years hence, perhaps much less, America 
may be what Britain now is. The innocence of her 
character, that won the hearts of all nations iu her 
favor, may sound like a romance, and her inimitable 
virtue be, as if it had never been. The ruins of that 
liberty thousands bled to obtain, may just furnish 
materials for a village tale. When we contemplate 



11 

the full o( empires, and tlie extinction of tlu^ nations 
of the old World, we S(>(' hnt little more, to excite 
onr rejj:ret, than monlderinij^ ruins, pompous palaces, 
magniticent monuments, lofty pyramids; but when 
the empire of America shall fall, the subject for 
contemplative sorrow will be infinitely greater than 
crumbling brass or marble can inspire. It will not 
then be said, here stood a temple of vast antiquity, 
a Babel of invisible height, or there a palace of 
sumptuous extravagance ; but here ! oh, painful 
thought, the noblest work of human wisdom, the 
greatest scene of human glor}-, the fair cause of 
freedom rose and fell." 

Such was a patriot's pondering over the imaginary 
eclipse of America's glory. That its fearful prognos- 
tications may not be realized, is, and ever should 
be, the fervent, earnest prayer of every heart that 
pulsates with one patriotic emotion for a country so 
deeply loved, and now, alas, so sorely tried. 

Our nation is at this hour passing through a most 
fearful fiery ordeal, destined to try its reins, and its 
heart. It may be, that if borne in the spirit in 
which all such chastisements should be borne, not in 
a spirit of pride, but in a spirit of self-condemnation 
— not in a spirit of arrogant defiance, and vain- 
glorious boasting, but of deep humility, that good 
may yet come out of evil. Separation, it is true, 
into two hostile parts, at the sword's point, at the 
cannon's mouth, along the dividing lines, has, alas, 
been made possible. In war, it has been proved to 
us, in spite of theories, that there is a Northern and 
a Southern Union ; but as with Nations, naturally 
and providentially distinct, the exhaustion of war 



12 

compels to peace : with States naturally and provi- 
dentially connected, let us hope, ultimately, for union 
even on two sides of what was once a boundary of 
blood and fire — that while we may be, for a season, 
two nations, the time may come, when worn out 
with violence, bloodshed and rapine, we may become 
prepared for another grand cycle of union — as one 
great and undivided people, responsible, as a whole, 
for what belongs to the whole ; and as a part, for 
what belongs to a part. 

No honest patriot, who has watched for years the 
current of events in this our land, but must confess 
that our national sins have been crying and grievous. 
The faith of our fathers has been abandoned — the 
self-sacrificing, compromising spirit of our early day 
has been forgotten, or if not forgotten, only remem- 
bered to be brought in striking mortifying contrast 
with the selfish schemes and narrow prejudices of an 
age of radicalism, infidelity, irreverence and insub- 
ordination. The allegiance and fealty of that early 
day were not mere counting house virtues, but com- 
bined in most loving union, obligations to neighbors 
and sections, with a most exalted sense of duty to 
God ; and the self-denying heaven-inspired patriotism 
of that golden age of the Republic looked upward in 
its devotion, reflecting back from glowing faces, some 
of the light of that heaven where love and sublime 
order are the first and greatest laws. 

We have too long lost sight of brotherly aff'ection 
and kindness. We have permitted the golden chain of 
fraternal afi'ection, whose links were welded in revo- 
lutionary fires, to be rudely snapped asunder in the 
fierce shock of partisan strife. We have allowed 



13 

sectional fanaticism to usurp the lofty godlike scat of 
an whole-souled omnipresent patriotism. As Timo- 
Icon addresses the Councillors in Massinger's Bond- 
man. 

'•"\Vo have uot, as good patriots should do, studied 
The public pood, but our particular ends, 
Factious among: ourselves, preferrinj? such 
To officers and honor, as ne'er read 
The elements of saving policy, 
But deeply skill'd in all the principles 
That usher in destruction." 

We have thought more of the prejudices and short- 
sighted passions of warring sections, than of the 
obligations of the Constitution, of union for the sake 
of temporary political success, than of the nobler 
Union our fathers left us, " ordained to establish 
justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, promote the 
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty 
for ourselves and our posterity." We have lost 
sight of the great principle, as one has most elo- 
quently said, " That this nation was not established 
for the purpose of fiercely contending either against 
the extension or abolition of slavery, forgetting every- 
thing else that could enure to the benefit of the 
dominant race in the struggle. This nation was 
placed here for purposes infinitely higher ; and if we 
had only been true to our stewardship, the lesser, 
with the greater trusts, would have been borne forward 
together, and God's purpose, for the free and for the 
slave, would have come to fruit in our hands, or those 
of our posterity; and not borne such apples of Sodom, 
that however fair and seeming they may appear 
without, have only turned to ashes on the Nation's 
lips." 



14 

These vices and short comings I have enumerated 
are unquestionably great national sins ; and nations, 
unlike individuals, must receive their punishment in 
this world. Our punishment is now upon us, and it 
is our duty to humble ourselves beneath the chastis- 
ing rod, and by diligently seeking to correct these 
evils, make manifest that genuine repentance, which 
shall induce us to go and sin no more. Then we may 
yet learn, as a Nation, that the mighty Power, which 
makes man to tremble at his frown, and with a hand 
of iron, shatters in pieces, can with a heart of compas- 
sion, return to pardon, to strengthen, and to heal. 

But to return from our apparent digression. 

Among the most conspicuous of the members of the 
Convention of 1787, who towered, like Saul, among 
their brethren, were Alexander Hamilton of New 
York, James Madison and George Washington, of 
Virginia, Rufus King, of Massachusetts, our own 
Paterson and Livingston, from New Jersey, Franklin 
and Wilson, from Pennsylvania, Martin and Davis 
from North Carolina, and Rutledge and Pinckney 
from South Carolina. These men had all been 
eminently distinguished in the service of the State 
during the Revolutionary contest, upon different 
arenas ; and the minds of the rest of their brethren 
turned instinctively, from the first towards them, as 
leaders, in whose ability and experience the nation 
reposed the utmost confidence. 

The Presidency, by a wise and perfectly natural 
instinct, was conferred upon Washington. His long 
valuable and unpaid service to the country ; his 
disinterested patriotism and holy zeal, in advancing 
and establishing her liberties his sword had won, 



15 

pointed liim out as tlic most proper man to )>resido 
over tlie deliberations of this au^j^ust body, AN'oidd 
to God, my friends, tliis Nation liad always reeoi,Mii/( il 
the swayings of that master liand, in whose linn 
grasp she first placed the helm of (ho young lle[)ublic 
— that it had confornKHl to his noble life as its 
pattern ; and to his principles as the guide-jjost of 
security and "wholesome progress. Wouhl that it 
could have heard more distinctly, and treasured more 
reverently, mid the first jar of contending sections, 
those ins])ired words of his, in that noblest legacy a 
patriot statesman ever left to his country — the Fare- 
well Address. Listen to its solemn notes of warning. 
"In contemplating, my countrymen, the causes 
which may disturb our Union — it is a subject of regret 
that any serious grounds should have been furnished 
for characterizing parties by geographical discrimina- 
tions, Northern and Southern — whence designing men 
may endeavor to excite a belief, that there is a real 
diff'erence of local interests and views. One of the 
expedients of party to acquire influence within par- 
ticular districts, is to misrepresent the opinion and 
aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves 
too much against the jealousies and heartburnings 
that spring from misrepresentation — tending to render 
alien to each other, those who ought to be bound 
together by the ties of fraternal aflection." If the 
whole North as well as South, had only bowed them- 
selves submissively to his teachings — and followed 
with the confiding faith of little children — those 
loving precepts, that fell from the lips of him — " who 
Heaven made childless, that a Nation might call him 
Father!" to-day the sound of hammers closing rivets 



16 

up, would not have been heard in this land, the 
ploughshare of war would have been still rusting in 
its furrow, the precious blood of brethren of one family 
and of one nation, would not be smoking from clashing 
avensins: steel : and the wail of the widowed, and the 
fatherless, of the mother for the pride of her heart, 
and the father for the hope of his house, would not 
at this hour be continually sounding its mournful 
dirge throughout the land. The ears of the nation 
would not have been full of the direful sounds of 

" The bursting shell, the gateway wrenched asunder, 
The rattlhig musketry, the clashing blade, 
And ever and anon in tones of thunder 
The diapason of the cannonade." 

What a rich legacy my countrymen ! our Nation's 
Father has left us, in that sublime Farewell 
Address from which I have quoted. It embodies the 
wisdom of the sage, with the foreknowledge of the 
prophet. It mingles the ardent fervor of the patriot, 
with the devoted love that earned for him in the 
world's history, the well-deserved title of " Father of 
his count)'//'' The boy may learn from it noble lessons 
that shall make him a better man, a more devoted 
citizen. The citizen, if he will study it, may find in 
it truths, which, if he will only cherish, must make 
him the more unselfish patriot. The statesman can 
draw from it wise aphorisms that if improved must 
compel him to curb his ambition, and look ever with 
a single eye to the welfare of his country. 

Oh, that this Nation had been taught to go to that 
Farewell Address, as the devout Moslem goes to the 
Heaven-sent Kaabah stone in the House of Allah, as 
its sanctuary and safeguard. Then, as from the 



17 

inspiration iiasliini,' from that Oriental talisman at 
Mcrca, the ^foslcm by a look ronccivcs that he attains 
a faith in his religion that dies not, and a sure 
certainty of its endnranee — so wonld it have been 
this nation's privilege, to have attained a ftiith in the 
republic that would never die, and a confidence in its 
endurance that no apprehension could shake. 

Notwithstanding the suggestions of the report 
made at Annapolis — the members of the Convention 
from the dilierent States, came to Philadelphia witli 
diversified powers. The smaller States with powers 
nearly the same — that is with instructions not to 
agree to any system that should take away from these 
States that equality of suffrage, and of political 
position secured by the original articles of Confedera- 
tion, This principle was of vital importance to the 
smaller States, as it was their shield of defence 
against any encroachments from the larger; and the 
struggle in defence of this principle, as we will 
presently see, taxed the energies and endurance of 
the Convention to the utmost. 

The Convention opened only with Representatives 
from seven States. Three days afterwards represen- 
tatives from Massachusetts and Connecticut took 
their seats ; but it was not until the Convention had 
been in session more than two months, that Repre- 
sentatives from twelve States were upon the floor. 

Three Parties soon developed on the floor of the 
Convention — 

First. A Party who had implicit faitli in the effi- 
ciency of a strong, consolidated Government, concen- 
trating as much power in the central head as possible : 
and completely anniliilating State sovereignties. 



18 

Second. AVhat was known as the State "Rights 
Party, who in their jealous fears, lest the rights of the 
State Governments might be compromised, if an 
entirely new system of Government was organized, 
favored simply a slight modification of the Articles of 
Confederation. 

Third. A Middle Party, who were in favor of 
retaining the sovereignty of the State Governments ; 
but with some restrictions — establishing a General 
Government over the whole; but conferring upon it 
powers to be limited and checked by the Constitution. 
This Party finally triumphed in the Convention : and 
to its labors and perseverance are we mainly in- 
debted for the present Constitution of the United 
States. 

Early in the second week of the Convention, Go- 
vernor Randolph, of Virginia, the leader of this Third 
or Middle Party, obtained the floor: and in a long 
elaborate speech attempted to exhibit the prominent 
defects in the Articles of Confederation. He de- 
nounced the sytem as totally inadequate to the peace, 
safety and security of the Confederation ; and urged 
the absolute necessity of a more energetic govern- 
ment. He ofi'ered at the conclusion of his speech 
fifteen Eesolutions, embodying, what he conceived 
ought to be the principles that should enter into a 
new Constitution. These resolutions proposed a Na- 
tional Legislature, to consist of two branches — a 
national Executive to consist of a single person, and 
a national judiciary composed of Judges who should 
hold office during good behavior. 

By this plan of Randolph's, however, the larger 
States were to have a representation in both branches 



1!) 

of tlic Niitional Lou:islaturo according to tlicir i)opu- 
latidii. This wi^nld lia\(' created an inetpiality so 
great, tliat in the Senate, the three hirgc States, 
rennsylvanin, Virginia, and ^Massachusetts would 
have had thirtcuMi Senators out of twenty-eight, and 
fifteen being a quorum, the controlling influence of 
such a vote would have been immense. Of course 
there were most serious objections in the minds of 
a large number of delegates to any such dangerous 
feature as this. These objections originated with 
the Kepresentativcs of the smaller States, who very 
naturally discovered in any such plan as this their 
complete absorption : and they prepared to resist it 
with most desperate energy. 

The Party in favor of a strong central consolidated 
Government at no time large in the Convention — find- 
ing that it could exert no influence alone, after it had, 
through Hamilton and Morris its leaders, laid before 
the Convention its propositions, which embraced the 
pkn of a government, that some of our modern poli- 
ticians now appear so strongly in f\ivor of — viz: what 
they call a strong government with all the charac- 
teristics of a monarchy, finally joined its forces to the 
Middle or Randolph Party, who were as I have just 
shown in flivor of giving the larger States a prepon- 
derating influence over the smaller. The object of 
the Hamilton party in making this alliance was, its 
enemies alleged, that it might obtain mutual sacri- 
fices from this Third Party in giving the Government 
to be formed, larger powers both as to its Legislative 
and Executive Departments. In departing from a 
federal system — the greater and wider the departure, 
the easier would they reach the accomplishment of 



20 

their favorite theory of an Executive for life, and a 
Senate for life, with powers conferred upon that 
Executive which differed very little from that of a 
monarch. But be this hypothesis as it may, certain 
it is that the accession^ of this Party gave great 
strength to the Virginia Plan as Mr. Pandolph's 
propositions were called ; and awakened, as well it 
might, serious misgivings in the minds of the dele- 
gates from the smaller States. 

For a fortnight, from the 30th of May to the 1 3th 
of June, this Virginia Plan was discussed in Commit- 
tee of the Whole with the most consummate ability 
— developing a reach of intellect, a versatility of 
talent, and a comprehensiveness of information, that 
we sigh for in vain in these degenerate days in our 
National Councils. The mere fragment of the debate 
that has come down to us, like the mutilated trunk of 
the Hercules in the Gallery of the Vatican, which 
shows even in its ruin, how divine the perfect statue 
stood ; proclaims how grand and massive this entire 
discussion must have been. 

On the 14th of June, Mr. Patterson, of this State, 
afterwards one of the Judges of the Supreme Court 
of the United States, whose industry, ability and 
tact were the admiration of his colleagues, made a 
motion that the farther consideration of this Report 
on the Virginia Resolution be postponed until the 
morrow, as he intended to offer a Plan to form a 
Federal system of Government, materially differing 
from the system under discussion. On the morrow, 
he offered a set of resolves, as a basis of amendment 
to the Articles of Confederation, known as " The Jer- 
sey Plan." This Plan was embodied in eleven Reso- 



lutions, antl ap[)(Mrs only to Ikivo contxMiiplatfd souk' 
important anuMulinonts to tlio oM Articlos of Coii- 
fodcration. Tlie e.\istin<j; C'oiitinoiital Conjjjrcss was 
to be preserved as the Federal Legislature, but with 
some additional powers. The Federal Executive to 
be elected by this Congress was to consist of a plu- 
rality of persons. This Jersey Plan embodied, gene- 
rally, the views of the delegates from the smaller 
States in the Convention. 

'. It was during the debate on this Jersey Flan, on 
the 19tli of June, that (ieneral Hamilton, as though 
with prophetic vision he was j)iercing the future, 
made use of the following remarkable language : 

'' I have great doubts whether a National Govern- 
ment, on Mr. Randolph's plan, (the plan, with some 
modifications, afterwards adopted,) can ever be made 
effectual. Men always love power, and States will 
prefer their particular concerns to the general wel- 
fare ; and as States become larger and more influen- 
tial, will they not be less attentive to the General 
Government ? I have said that a good Government 
ought to have force. By force I mean the coercion 
of arms as well as of laws, AVill the remark apply 
to the government to be instituted by this Virginia 
plan, with its imperium in imperio, with its State 
sovereignties circling round a central sovereignty \ I 
think not. A delinquent State must be compelled to 
obedience by force of arms. How is this to be done, 
under a system that recognizes States as sovereign, 
and is to hold them together in their orbits by the 
attractive power of good will and affection % At the 
first attempt to coerce by arms, you inaugurate a re- 
volution that will not cease until it has deluged the 



22 

land ill the blood of brethren, and overturned the 
Constitution." 

Hamilton was opposed to both the plans of Vir- 
ginia and New Jersey, although he finally gave his 
vote for the first. He thought both too remote for 
the public expectation. The Virginia plan, perhaps, 
approached the nearest to it ; but as for the Jersey 
plan, " it was only pork, still, with only a change of 
sauce." 

Hamilton was the leader of that small party in the 
Convention who were for a General and National 
Government, completely sovereign in itself, annihi- 
lating State sovereignties altogether. A government 
which, had it been established, might have justified 
and made good the modern theories of those who, in 
our day, find a huge centripetal power in the General 
Government, hut erdirehj inapplicahle to the system that 
luas estnhlished. 

His luminous perception and far-casting judgment 
seemed to anticipate that weakness which, in the 
hour of trial, must necessarily manifest itself in a 
government, where the bonds that united the several 
States were formed out of the strands of mutual de- 
pendence, aff'ection and good will. He appeared to 
be apprehensive, and so expressed himself in nu- 
merous letters to his friends, that a government such 
as was contemplated by the Virginia plan, would 
simply rest upon the sandy foundations of harmony 
and good will, that if ever disturbed, must shake to 
the centre, if it did not finally overthrow the entire 
fabric itself. Events transpiring around us — the re- 
public 'mid the agonizing throes of civil war, have 
confirmed the worst of this great statesman's appre- 



23 

lionsiou!^ ; and tlio significant interrogatory put to the 
Convontion of 1787 — how nn(h'r your jilau arc you 
to coorco (k^linquent and disohcdient States hy i'ovcn 
of arms'? remains unanswered still, awaiting its terri- 
hle solution in the acts of nearly a million of men 
breathing hate, defiance and slaughter against each 
other. 

It is a fact not generally known, that the power 
to coerce by arms delinquent and disobedient States, 
was proposed by Mr. Randolph to be given to Con- 
gress, but was by a most decisive vote postponed 
indefinitely. On the 29th of ^Fay, 1787, as appears 
by Elliott's debates, Mr. Kandolpli introduced the 
following proposition : " That jmwcr he given to Con- 
gress to negative all lairs passed hy the several States, 
contravenitig in the opinion of the National Legislature 
the articles of Union : or any treaty snhsisting under 
the articles of Union : and to have power to call for the 
armed force of the Union against any memher of the 
same failing to fulfil its duty under the articles thereof^ 

Mr. Madison immediately moved the indefinite 
postponement of the proposition: and said, "The 
more I reflect on the use of force, the more I doubt 
the practicability and efficiency of it, when applied 
to a people collectively. The use of an armed force 
against a disobedient State or States, would look 
more like a declaration of war than the infliction of 
punishment, and would be rightly considered a dis- 
solution of the previous compacts by which it might 
be bound." Mr. Madison, in opposing the propo- 
sition with great earnestness, said: "The most jar- 
ring elements, fire and water, are not more incom- 
patible than such a strange mixture of civil liberty 



24 

and military execution. Will the militia march from^ 
one State to the other for the purpose of coercion'? 
If they do, will not the citizens of invaded States 
assist one another, until they rise and as one man 
shake off, what they will denounce as the hated 
Union altogether. If you subjugate them, how are 
you to hold them, under a Constitution that is to be 
imposed to insure domestic tranquillity, and promote 
the general welfare'?" 

Governor Ellsworth, afterwards the Chief Justice 
of the Supreme Court of the United States, then a 
member from Connecticut, still more forcibly said: 

"No doubt a coercion principle is necessary for 
the Union; but it is a momentous question, whether 
it shall simply be a coercion of laws, or of arms. 
Where will those who advocate military coercion 
landl A necessary consequence of their principle 
will be eventually a war of States, one against the 
other. Attempt to execute the laws of the Union 
by sending an armed force against a disobedient 
State or States, and the nation will be involved in 
iintold calamities." 

Elbridge Gerry said: 

" Sir — This if I understand it, is to be no govern- 
ment of force. No free government is a government 
of force. Fear is essentially the attribute of the 
slave. And the government appealing to this prin- 
ciple for support is already a despotism. Opinion, 
free intelligent public opinion, can alone perpetuate 
our institutions, and when this fails all that can 
maintain them fails. The sword can dissolve, but it 
can never cement the Union together by the blood 
of its own citizens." 



'Jo 



Gen. Ilainiltoii still mori' ixiiuU'dly said in llic 
New York CoiiviMitioii : ■• It has been observed that 
to coerce States by military force was one of" the 
wildest projects ever devised. Under the form of 
Government you are now to establish, it wonid be, 
A failnrc to comply with the laws of the Union will 
never be confined to a sinujle State. This being the 
case wonld it be wise to hazard civil war? Snppose 
Massachusetts, or any large State, should refuse to 
obey the laws of the Union, and Congress should 
attempt to coerce, wonld not jMassachusetts have 
influence to procure assistance from those States 
lying contiguous? What a picture does such an idea 
present to view ! Can any reasonable man expect 
to be well disposed towards Government, that would 
make war, carnage and desolation, the means of sup- 
porting itself?" 

In fact, no impartial mind can carefully study the 
Debates of the Constitutional Conventions, seeking 
for light, and light only, without being overmastered 
by the conviction — that the enlightened framers of 
that Constitution believed that the moral interpo- 
sition of the States, resting on the force of reason, 
and appeals to a sane public opinion would redress 
every real grievance in the practical operations of the 
system they were about to inaugurate. In all the 
contemporary discussions in the State Conventions, 
upon the adoption of the Constitution — the State 
Governments are constantly referred to — " as afford- 
ing in every possible contingency, a complete security 
against the invasions of Federal authority — and espe- 
cially after the Parsons amendment — insisted upon 
by Massachusetts — was made part of the Constitu- 



26 

tion." " That Powers not delegated to the United 
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to 
the States, are reserved to the States respectively or 
to the people." They were to be ultimately not only 
the voice but the arm of the public discontent. Says 
Madison, in the Federalist, No. 28th — "It may be 
received as an axiom in our political system, that 
State governments will in all possible contingencies 
afford complete security against invasions of the 
public liberty by national authority. The Legisla- 
tures of States will have better means of information 
— they can discover danger at a distance, and pos- 
sessing all the organs of civil power, and the confi- 
dence of the people they can at once adopt a regular 
plan of opposition to the national government, in 
which they can combine all the resources of the com- 
munity. The great extent of country is a further 
security. We have already experienced its utility 
against the attacks of a foreign enemy. And it 
would have precisely the effect against the enter- 
prises of ambitious rulers in the national councils. 
If the Federal army should be able to quell the 
resistance of one State, the distant States would have 
it in their power to make headway with fresh forces. 
The advantage obtained in one place, must be aban- 
doned to subdue the opposition in others: and the 
moment the part which has been reduced into sub- 
mission is left to itself, its efforts would be renewed 
and resistance revive." 

Says Hamilton, vol. 1st, p. 169, of the Federalist — 

" The State Legislatures will not only be vigilant, 

but suspicious and jealous guardians of the people, 

against the encroachments of the Federal Govern- 



27 

nicnt. Tlicy \Nill be irady cnoiii;li if any t]iin<^ 
happens to sound the alarm to the j)(M)plc, and not 
only beeonie the voice but the ((i'}ii of tlicir discon- 
tent/' 

Says Hamilton again, in No. 10, "Whoever con- 
siders the populousness and strength of several of 
these States singly at the present juncture, and looks 
forward to what they will become, even at the dis- 
tance of half a century, will at once dismiss as idle 
and visionary any scheme which aims at regulating 
them or coercing them in their collective capacities 
by the General Government. A project of this kind 
is little less romantic than the monster-taming spirit, 
attributed to the flibulous heroes, and demigods of 
antiquity." 

And again, in No. 16 — 

"Even in those confederacies which have been 
composed of members smaller than many of our 
counties, the principle of legislation for sovereign 
States, supported by military coercion, has never been 
found effectual. It has rarely been attempted to be 
employed against the w^eaker members ; and in most 
instances, attempts thus to coerce the refractory and 
disobedient have been the signals of bloody wars, in 
which one half the Confederacy has displayed its 
banners against the other. We want no sucn gov- 
ernment as this." 

This is the testimony of the men who made the 
Constitution, and it stands upon the record in letters 
so plain — that he who runs may read, and the way- 
farinir man thouMi a fool cannot err therein. 

In fact this appeared to have been the theory at 
first adopted by President Lincoln and Secretary 



28 

Seward, judging from the following letter written by 
the latter to Mr. Adams, the present Minister to 
England, and to whose sentiments I invite particular 
attention. They are sentiments for the utterance of 
which the Secretary has not scrupled to send more 
honest men than himself to the gloomy casemates of 
Lafayette and AVarren. On the 10th of April, 1861, 
he writes to Mr. Adams the following remarkable 
letter: 

'• For these reasons he (the President) could not 
be disposed to reject a cardinal dogma of theirs, (the 
seceding States,) namely^ that the Federal Government 
could not reduce the seceding States to obedience hy con- 
quest, even although he was disposed to question the 
proposition. Bid in fact the President ivillingly accepts 
it as true — only an imperial or despotic government could 
have the right to suhjugate disaffected and insurrectionary 
States. This Federal Repuhlican system of ours is, of 
all forms of Government, the very one, which is most im- 
fitted for such a labor." 

It will require more than the proverbial ingenuity 
and craft of the Secretary to escape from the logical 
conclusion that such a letter must create in the mind 
of every man that reads it: 

Great injustice has unquestionably been done to 
the memory of Hamilton, on account of his support 
of a strong government, with an Executive and Senate 
for life, but no man who has read carefully the event- 
ful story of his useful life, can doubt for a moment his 
high-toned patriotism. It was the honest conviction 
of his mind, that such a government was the best at 
the time for the country, and so believing, he sup- 
ported his peculiar views in the Convention with all 



29 

that ability, zral and rxhanstlcss ])o\V(n' in (l('l»at(> for 
Avliicli ho was so (Iistin«j;iiisli(>(l. Nor wlicn lii<; lavor- 
it(> ]n-()ji>(t was defeated did he retire IVoiii the Con- 
vention discontented, and o])pose the plan snhniittcd 
in the several State Conventions as some did ; but lie 
gave to it the immense aid of his boundless resources 
and personal influence. His eloquent speeches in the 
Convention of New York, and the productions of his 
pen in those able numbers of the Federalist, will ever 
remain as monuments of his patriotism, ability and 
statesmanship. 

When the Jersey plan, brought forward by Mr. 
Patterson, came up before the Convention, it was lost, 
receiving only the votes of New Jersey and Delaware 
in its favor. The Jersey plan being thus summarily 
dealt with, the Convention took up the Virginia plan, 
and commenced the discussion of the Resolutions. 

One of the most salient objections to the Virginia 
plan, grew out of the llesolution providing for the 
representation of the House of Representatives by 
the States according to population. The debate upon 
this Resolution was fierce, determined and exciting. 
Those wdio advocated the Resolution contended that 
when the Articles of Confederation were formed, it 
was only from necessity and expediency that the 
States were allowed to have an equal vote ; but now 
there was to be a change in our condition — the 
larger States who considered this equality of repre- 
sentation as contrary to their interests would not 
submit to it any longer. That no State ought to 
desire to have influence in a government except in 
proportion to what it contributed. That taxation and 
representation ought to go together. That if one State 



'80 

had sixteen times as many inhabitants as another, or 
was sixteen times as wealthy, it ought to have sixteen 
times as many votes. The larger States were deter- 
mined never to submit to any other principle in the 
organization of any new government. Equality of 
suffrage, and of representation were the rotten parts 
in the old Articles of Confederation. 

Those who advocated State equality on the other 
hand, took the matter up on the original principles 
of Government. They urged that all men considered 
in a state of nature, before any government framed, 
are equally tree and independent, no one having any 
right or authority to exercise power over another ; 
and this too without any regard to difference in per- 
sonal strength, standing and wealth. That when 
individuals consent to become the subjects of Gov- 
ernment they have a right to an equal voice in every 
matter relating to that government. That when a 
number of States unite themselves under a Federal 
Government, the same principles apply to them. 
That every argument that shows one man ought not 
to have more votes than another, because he is wiser, 
stronger, or wealthier, proves that one State ought 
not to have more votes than another, because it is 
stronger, wiser, or wealthier. History was ransacked 
for illustrations. The equality of votes in the Am- 
phyctyonic Councils of Greece — in the seven prov- 
inces of the United Netherlands, and the Cantons of 
Switzerland were referred to as precedents, sustaining 
their respective postulates. In fact the debate took 
a most extensive range, and brought out in bold 
relief the varied and comprehensive knowledge of 
State policy, the history of the organizations of Gov- 



31 

cnniKMits, ami tlu^ rt'inarkaMr political sagacity of 
those who participated in tlio discussion. It was 
exceedingly animated, at times angry; and when the 
question was called, a majority decided in favor of 
representation according to popidation — Massachu- 
setts, New Hampshire, rennsylvania, Virginia, North 
Carolina and Georgia voting for it — Connecticut, 
New York, then among the small States, New Jersey, 
Maryland and Delaware voting against it. And thus 
the principle of representation according to population 
was established as the principle to govern the organ- 
ization of the House of lleprcsentatives. 

Ui)on the question of the same kind of Ptc^jrcscn- 
tation in the Senate, being brought forward the next 
day, but little discussion ensued, the subject having 
been exhausted in the previous debate. Upon the 
votes being taken on the question, five States, Massa- 
chusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina and 
South Carolina were in favor of such Representation, 
while Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware 
and Maryland opposed, with Georgia divided. Here 
was a dead lock. Tlie most intense excitement pre- 
vailed — neither party would give way ; crimination 
and recrimination followed. Delegates from the 
smaller States most emphatically declared that if 
equality of representation was denied them in the 
Senate, they would leave the body, and return to 
their constituents. They would never consent to be 
part of a government, that must be inevitably charac- 
terized by all the essentials of the worst species of 
tyranny. The representatives of the larger States 
retired with expressions of great bitterness, and the 
assertion of a determination never to yield to the 



32 

impudent arrogance of the smaller States. The con- 
dition of affairs looked threatening. It was just at 
this exciting moment, that the tall form of Franklin 
was seen rising in the midst of the Hall; and having 
been at once recognized by the Chairman, in the 
midst of a profound silence, invoked by the gravity 
of his mien, and the startling solemnity of the hour, 
he said : 

"iHr. President — In the situation of this Assembly, 
groping as it were in the dark, to find political truth, 
and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to 
us, how has it happened. Sir, that we have not 
hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the 
Father of Light, to illuminate our understanding 1 
In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, 
while w^e were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers 
in this very Hall for Divine protection. They w^ere 
graciously answered. All of us, who were engaged 
in that struggle, must have observed frequent in- 
stances of a superintending Providence in our favor. 
To that kind Providence we owe this happy opportu- 
nity of consulting, in peace, upon our future national 
felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful 
Friend ? or do we imagine that we no longer need 
his assistance ? I have lived. Sir, a long time, and 
the longer I live the more convincing proofs I see, 
' that God governs in the affairs of men,' and if a 
sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, 
is it probable that an empire can rise without his aidl 
We have been assured. Sir, in sacred writ, that except 
the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that 
build it. I firmly believe this ; and I also believe 
that without his concurring aid, we shall succeed in 



33 

the political buildini^ no better tlian did tli(> builders 
of Babel. We shall be divided by our jiartial local 
interests, our projects confounded, and we ourselves 
become a bye word and reproach to future ages." 

These were most certainly noble words, in every 
way worthy the Sage, Patriot and Philosopher who 
uttered them. They were timely words, recalling the 
minds of many, whose angry passions were getting 
the better of their judgments, to the necessity of that 
Divine interposition, to say, " Peace, be still !" to the 
angry waves, lest the ship freighted with the best 
interests of humanity, should go down in the fierce 
storm that was then howling around her. 

The next morning the difficulty upon this vexed 
question of representation between the larger and 
small States seemed to be more complicated than 
ever. Fur awliilc the pertinacity Avitli which the 
opposing parties clung to their opinions, threatened 
the violent disruption of the body. By the Declara- 
tion of Independence each State had been declared 
to be free, sovereign and independent of each other. 
The solemn tones of tliat instrument had declared 
them free and independent States. The old Thirteen, 
before the Revolution, were dependent Colonies of 
Great Britain, but still each was a separate and dis- 
tinct community, with different laws; and each there- 
fore was independent and sovereign. The delegates 
from the small States therefore insisted upon a recog- 
nition of their equality in the Senate. The delegates 
from the larger States still clamored for the same 
principle that had prevailed in the organization of 
the House of Keprcsentatives. This contention was 

3 



34 

so violent and obstinate that it at last brought the 
Convention, as we have seen, to a dead stand. 

General Pinckney, at this critical period proposed 
that a Committee, consisting of one member from 
each State, should be appointed to devise and report 
some compromise. Luther Martin said " he had no 
objection to a Committee, but no modification what- 
ever could reconcile the smaller States to the least 
diminution of their right of equal sovereignty." 
Hoger Sherman said, " we are at a dead lock ; nobody 
hoped we should break up without doing some- 
thing. He was in favor of the Committee, and he 
trusted it would hit upon some expedient." 

The result of the conference was a report from the 
Committee, recommending that each State should be 
equally represented in the Senate. That in the 
House each State be allowed one member for every 
40,000 inhabitants, and that each State, not contain- 
ing that number, be allowed one member. That all 
bills for raising or apportioning money, shall originate 
in the House of Representatives, and that no money 
be drawn from the public Treasury but in pursuance 
of appropriations originating in the House. Both 
these propositions, excepting out the basis of repre- 
sentation for the House, were, after a most angry 
debate, in which Yates and Lansing, of New York, 
left the Convention, adopted. 

This was the first compromise of the Constitution ; 
and the result was, to give to us of the smaller States, 
that equality of representation we now enjoy in the 
Senate, with the larger States of the Republic. It 
was a great triumph ; but only achieved, as I have 
shown, by mutual concession and moderation, each 



85 

party i)artini2: witli a portion of its demands for tlie 
sake of the liannony and peace of the whole. The 
smaller States secured this equality of representation 
by yielding up the priviloi^e of originating^ all money 
bills to that Chamber where the larger States were to 
be represented according to population. 

But no sooner had this difficulty been settled, than 
another arose, involving questions of grave moment, 
and evoking another conflict between sections, threat- 
ening, if anything, greater mischief than before. 

This difficulty originated upon the grave question, 
how the people were to be represented in the lower 
House of Congress — whether it was to be propor- 
tioned to the free inhabitants, or in proportion to the 
whole population, including slaves. There were 
various reasons urged why slaves should be enume- 
rated in apportioning the representation. Eleven 
out of thirteen States had agreed to consider slaves 
in the apportionment of taxation, and taxation and 
representation ought to go together. Slave labor 
added as much as free labor to the wealth of the 
State, and ought to bear the burden of taxation ; 
therefore it should be represented. 

On the other side it was most strenuously urged, 
that no principle could justify the taking of slaves 
into the computation, in apportioning the number of 
representatives a State should have in the govern- 
ment. That it involved the absurdity of increasing 
the power of a State in making laws for freemen in 
proportion as that State violated the laws of freedom. 
That it might be proper to take slaves into con- 
sideration when taxes were to be apportioned, 
because it had a tendency to discourage slavery. 



36 

That slaves could not be taken into the account as 
men or citizens, because they were not admitted to 
the right of citizenship in those States where slavery 
most prevailed. If they were to be taken into the 
account as property, what peculiar principle or cir- 
cumstances should render such property entitled to 
the high privilege of conferring consequence and 
power on the government, to its owners, rather than 
any other kind of property ; and why should slaves 
be taken into account more than horses, cattle, or 
any other species of property] 

The difficulty was finally adjusted by the proposi- 
tion of Mr. Wilson, of Pennsylvania, fixing the basis 
of representation according to numbers ; and pro- 
viding that the numbers shall be determined " by 
adding to the whole number of free persons, including 
those bound to service for a term of years, and 
excluding Indians, not taxed, three-fifths of all other 
persons." 

Now, notice, the South had claimed that all slaves 
should be counted equally with the free inhabitants. 
This the North were unwilling to grant; but Mr. 
Wilson's proposition embraced a principle familiar to 
the country, and upon which the States had con- 
tributed to the expenses of the war of the Revolution. 
It was the three-fifths rule, by which five slaves were 
to be equivalent to three free citizens. This proposi- 
tion of Wilson's was adopted by the vote of all the 
States, except New Jersey and Delaware. 

This was the second compromise ; and truly it was a 
most important one, since it reconciled the prejudices 
of those in the Convention who were inimical to the 
existence of Slavery. 



37 

There can be no question at all that some of the 
most resolute enemies to slavery were to be ibund 
amonij Southern nu>n. The Sontliern States had 
been foremost in resistin<j; the introduction of slaves ; 
and at the very outset of the Revolution, Virginia 
and North Carolina had interdicted the slave trade. 
It was the impression of many of the Southern states- 
men, that a general emancipation might ultimately 
be accomplished that would rid the country of the 
evil altogether. But there were men in the Conven- 
tion who were tenacious of the institution, who 
believed in it as authorized not only by the laws of 
Nature, but by the revealed word of God. They 
entertained no conscientious scruples therefore about 
holding men in bondage ; and they manifested a 
nervous sensitiveness in reference to any measure that 
appeared to them as an infringment upon their rights, 
or a reflection upon the justice of the institution. 
Most of the statesmen of the North, with the excep- 
tion of some from the Eastern States, whose con- 
stituents had grown rich in the traffic of slaves, were 
opposed to the existence of slavery; and if they 
could have discovered any feasible or judicious mode 
of getting rid of it, would have availed themselves of 
it. But they could see none, without entailing 
greater evils upon the country, by exasperating their 
fellow members from the South, and jeopardizing the 
formation of that Constitution, u[)on which so many 
grave and weighty interests were suspended. There 
was a strong fraternal feeling existing between the 
sections. The blood of the Carolinas, and of Massa- 
chusetts, yet smoked u[)on common battle fields. The 
recollections of a kindred language, common dangers 



38 

and sufferings, still burned within them. Patriotism 
proved more powerful than jealousy, and conservatism 
than fanaticism. Our fathers sacrificed their feelings, 
their prejudices, their interests, their ambition, for the 
public safety. They dared not, when the interests of 
their country were trembling in the balance, hazard 
the exasperation of any section, even iJiongli they might 
have thought it only Uiister at the time. Would to God 
their descendants had been as devoted and as cautious: 
and then the Union of these States might have still 
remained what our Fathers left it — the world's 
wonder, the common heritage, the common glory of 
all the States. Both sections have been forgetful of 
the teachings of the past, and turned a deaf ear to 
the counsels of those who, having realized the 
necessity of concession, warned their countrymen 
against the evil influences of an unbending obstinate 
spirit in the settlement of all our internal discussions. 

The only other matter of grave importance encoun- 
tered by the Convention was elicited by the discussion, 
which finally resulted in the addition of the 9th 
Article to the Constitution, providing that the 
importation of such persons as any of the States now 
existing think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited 
prior to 1808, but a duty may be imposed on such 
importation not exceeding ten dollars." 

This clause I find as first reported by the com- 
mittee of detail was general in its provisions, and 
embraced no restrictions as to time — in other words, 
it provided for the unlimited existence of the slave 
trade. This feature was rejected by the votes of 
eight States — Georgia, South Carolina and North 
Carolina, voting for no restriction, and declaring 



39 

they would never consent to give the General Gov- 
ernment power to restrict. The continued discussion 
being likely to engender more difficulty, the whole 
matter was referred to a committee of one from each 
State ; and to the same committee was also referred 
another provision reported by the committee of detail 
— to wit, no navigation act shall be passed without 
the assent of two-thirds of the members from all the 
States present in both Houses — a proposition which 
the Southern producing States were solicitous to 
retain, least commerce should be placed too much 
under the control of the Eastern States, who were 
directly interested in navigation. 

The Select Committee soon made a report in flivor 
of an unrestricted right of Congress to pass Naviga- 
tion Laws, and against any prohibition of the African 
Slave Trade prior to 1800. 

Great anxiety was felt by the New England States, 
for fear the South should insist on the two-thirds 
vote principle in regard to navigation laws; and 
when, therefore, South Carolina, by one of her mem- 
bers, moved to extend the time for the prohibition of 
the Slave Trade to 1808, Gorham of Massachusetts 
seconded the motion, and it was carried by the votes 
of Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire. 
The Southern members, grateful for this evidence of 
liberality on the part of their Northern brethren, 
were willing to give perfect freedom in legislation to 
the interests of navigation. 

This was the Third and last compromise effected 
in the formation of our Constitution. 

Upon the clause in reference to the rendition of 
fugitives from labor, there was in fact no discussion, 



40 

or at least no contest in the Convention. Every one 
acquiesced instinctively in the good sense of the 
provision, not wholly unknown to the New England 
States. This very clause in the Constitution, was in 
fact copied from a clause in what was known as the 
Fundamentals or Body of Liberties, drawn up in 
Massachusetts in 1641, which body of Laws ex- 
pressly sanctioned the holding of negroes in per- 
petual bondage. Massachusetts, in entering upon 
the terms of Union with the other States, insisted 
upon this provision, in order that she might make a 
demand for her slaves passing into the other States 
of the New England Confederacy. 

The fugitive labor clause in our Constitution was 
originally a New England measure : and at the time 
of its introduction into our Constitution met with 
general acquiescence. It was reserved for a later 
and more degenerate day, whose fanaticism overruled 
its reason, to manufacture and keep up an excite 
ment, that has assisted materially in engendering 
civil strife. 

There was one other clause of the Constitution 
that seems at this particular juncture to demand a 
passing notice at my hands, and which at the time 
received the hearty support and co-operation of every 
member of the Convention. It is in these words : 

" The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus 
shall not be suspended, except when in cases of 
rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require 
it." 

Now an interpretation has been given to this 
clause in our day, that I am sure would astonish 
those who framed it. The true spirit and intent of 



41 

this clause is as clear as sunlight t(i any man wlio 
^vill study tlu^ history of tlic debates both at the time 
of the formation of the Constitution, and when it 
was submitted to the States for tluir adoption. 
There were members in the Convention who were 
in favor of making the enjoyment of the privilege of 
this writ absolute at all times, in the same manner as 
it was intended the liberty of the press, of speech, 
and of religion .should be enjoyed. There were 
others again who favored limitations of time, and. 
suspension on certain conditions. This clause itself 
therefore appears to have been a mean between 
extremes of opinion, and was intended to reconcile 
conflicting views. There is very little light thrown 
upon the subject by the discussions in the Conven- 
tion, but the peculiar position occupied by this clause 
in the Constitution is significant, and if not conclu- 
sive, is at least suggestive of the particular Depart- 
ment upon which it was intended to confer this 
power. There has been a great deal of hair splitting, 
and strained constructions of the logic of probabili- 
ties, to find some defence for the recent course of the 
Executive in suspending this great writ of Ilight by 
his own volition. But as yet, no champion has 
appeared in the lists, whose spear has not been 
shivered, and himself unhorsed in the conflict that 
has grown out of this subject. Mr. Binney's legal 
ability and searching analysis have been exhausted 
in vain, in his attempt to shield the Executive. The 
replies that his effort has called forth, have made 
manifest how Truth with sling and pebble only, is 
more than a match for Error, though of gigantic 
strength and panoplied in heavy armor. 



42 

But if from the proceedings of the Convention, 
and the debates in that body, nothing satisfactory 
can be gleaned upon the subject, much may be 
learned from the after debates in the State Conven- 
tions, to whom the Constitution was sent for ratifica- 
tion. We have not space for but one reference. 
Governor Randolph of Virginia, who might be called 
in a measure the fashioner and planner of our Con- 
stitution, in reply to Patrick Henry in the Virginia 
Convention, who had assailed the Constitution, to 
use his own language, ^''because it conferred the power 
to suspend the great writ of Right, the Habeas Corpus, 
upon the Legislature, in case of invasion or rebellion,^' 
said, " I contend, Mr. President, that the Habeas 
Corpus in this Constitution is at least on as good and 
secure a footing as it is in England. In that country, 
its suspension depends upon the will of the Legislature, 
and not upon the Crown. That great writ is secured 
here to the citizen in the same wag. It can only be 
suspended by the Legislature in cases of extreme 
emergency, never by the Executive." 

Our fathers very justly conceived that in dan- 
gerous critical times like the present, the people 
would be willing to part with a portion of their 
freedom temporarily, but the warning voice of history 
had clearly indicated to them, that such loss to be 
endurable must rest in the discretion of their Repre- 
sentatives, and not in the breast of one man. They 
had' read the history of the causes of revolution too 
closely, not to know, that this one man power would 
not be to leratedfor a moment, except by those who, 
in Jefferson's language, " were born with saddles on 



43 

their Imcks, and bits in tlicir niontlis, tliiit tyrants 
might ride and spnr tluMii hy tlio <:;rafo of Cjod." 

Tlic niL-n of onr early day had a perfect horror of 
conferring arbitrary power upon a single indi\i(hial. 
To tliem, arbitrary power in whatever shape it 
appeared, whether under the veil of legitimacy, or 
skulking in the disguise of State necessity, or pre- 
senting the shameless front of usurpation, was the 
sure object of their detestation and liostility. They 
might give the power to suspend this writ tempo- 
rarily to the law-making authority, because directly 
responsible to its constituency, and because due 
notice must be given by a Legislative Act, which 
would be the warning to the citizen, whenever the 
-exigency arrived. But to leave it optional in the 
discretion of one man, however exalted, or honest, he 
might be, to strike down the liberty of the citizen in 
a moment, vv^ithout notice and without warning, as 
has been done, this, those haters of tyranny would 
never have consented to. They believed in the 
language of Burke, in his speech on the Impeach- 
ment of Hastings, "It is a contradiction in terms, it 
is blasphemy in religion, it is wickedness in politics, 
to say that any one man in a free State should 
possess arbitrary power at any time either in peace 
or in war." 

It was unquestionably the grand aim of the 
framers of the Constitution of the United States 
to establish a government which would not only be 
nominally free, but substantially so. And it was 
with this view they reared those barriers to political 
mal-administration which had been unfolded to their 
observation, and were the gathered wisdom of a 



44 

thousand years. They knew that the safety of the 
people was the supreme law ; but they believed the 
Constitution to be the supreme law. As a great 
jurist has said — " above that Constitution there is no 
law, outside of it there is no security." 

Our fathers were conversant with the exact nature 
of the rights that had been secured by Magna Gliarta 
in the old world : and all these were embodied in the 
Amendments to the Constitution. Darin"; the struijo-le 
between the Monarch and the Commons in 1628 in 
reference to the royal grant of a Declaration of Rights, 
Charles the First took the ground " that there might 
be times of danger when the necessity of the case would 
demand the unrestricted exercise of the royal prero- 
gative, and for the time being the liberty of the sub- 
ject must give way." Hear the noble answer of Sir 
Edward Coke to this royal assumption : " I know 
that prerogative is part of the Law, hut sovereign poioer 
is no iKirHamentary tvord. In my opinion Mr. Speaker 
it weakens Magna Charta, and all the Statutes con- 
cerning the liberty of the subject, for tliey are ahsolute 
without any saving of sovereign fotuer. Take we heed 
what we yield unto. Magna Charta is such a fellov) that 
he ivill have no sovereign. Our predecessor could not 
endure a ' salvo jure suo,' no more than the King of 
old could endure with the Church ' salvo Dei et 
ecclesiae.'" 

And the bold Wentworth, who had even bearded 
the King's tyrant father in the last reign, seconded 
Coke in such language as this : -" If we allow this 
saving of the King's prerogative, we shall leave the 
subject worse than we found him, and we shall have 
little thanks for our labor, when we come home. Let 



45 

lis Icavi^ all power to his ^[ajpsty to punish nialcfar- 
tors, hilt these laws concerniiii; the lilxn-ty of tho siih- 
ject are not acquainted with sovereign power." 

The result of tliat hold struggle hetween the people 
and tlie royal prerogative is one of the nohlest events 
in the history of freedom. They forced the King to 
yield, and to say, " Let right be done as it is desired." 
Shall the men of this free Republic in the middle of 
the 19th century, be less regardful of their liberties, 
than those bold spirits who accomplished so much for 
freedom in 1628"? 

The men of our Constitutional Convention were 
familiar with the history of the civil polity of the 
world. But most thoroughly had they studied this 
contest that had been going on for centuries in the 
mother country, between the crown and the people — 
the struggle between prerogative and privilege. IMany 
of them were the descendants of thoie brave spirits 
who in England had wrested from the crown the liigh 
prerogative it claimed of arresting the citizen without 
cause, and had secured this great privilege for the 
people— the Writ of Kight. In the mother country, 
so jealous were they of the exercise of this great writ 
affecting the personal liberty of the people, they 
would not even in cases of war and insurrection confer 
it upon the crown ; but they left it to the wise discre- 
tion of the Parliament. They would not take the 
humors of any one man for a warrant to deprive the 
subject of his liberty. AVilliam the Third apologized 
to the Commons once, when he had ventured to sus- 
pend the writ, without their consent, saying " he had 
been compelled to trespass on the laws of England," 
and asking their advice, which was given in an Act 



46 

of Parliament, practically suspending the 'writ for a 
time. 

Our fathers had been protestants against preroga- 
tive and its usurpations. They had felt its iron hand 
rest heavy on their loins; and when they put this 
clause in the Constitution in reference to the Habeas 
Corpus, they put it there, that it might stand as the 
great breakwater against the efforts of arbitrary, 
unlicensed power. The descendants of those who 
braved the terrors of new oceans, the wilderness and 
the savage, in their devoted attachment to the privi- 
leges granted by Magna Charta and the Bill of Eights, 
were not likely to be content with any lower standard 
of freedom than that enjoyed, or at least secured, by 
the British Constitution. And yet there are men in 
this our hour of trial and danger, who have the bold- 
ness to contend, against the testimony of the men 
who framed the Constitution, against the opinions of 
Marshall and Kent and Story, against the decisions 
of our highest legal tribunals ; that this clause in the 
Constitution confers upon the Executive, whenever 
the exigency provided for in it shall arise, the power 
of suspending this great Writ of Right — a power 
which no English sovereign can exercise even upon 
the happening of just such an exigency, "Why the 
incongruity of the position is enough for us to deny 
it. Such a postulate as this would be fatal to the 
very existence of that Constitution, for whose preser- 
vation we are told this war is being waged. 

No wonder that the sober second thought of the 
Nation should be found protesting against the assump- 
tion of such a dangerous power. No wonder that 
Senator Hale, to question whose loyalty might con- 



47 

sign one to the casemates of Lafayette or Warren, 
recently uttered the following on the Hoor of the 
Senate : 

" Senators ! You may gain your victories over the 
sea. You may sweep the enemy from the hroad 
ocean. You may crush every rebel arrayed against 
you ; aiul when you have done all that, and established 
a military power such as the world has never known, 
and a naval power such as England never dreamed 
of; if constitutional lihcrtij and the rigid of the citi.iCn to 
be protected cigainst illegal arrests, without cause shown, 
he buried or destroyed, you have got hut a harren victory 
at hest, and achieved only everlasting shame, which tcill 
retwn to i)lague you, ivhen this zvar is over.''^ 

Good sensible people, in these exciting times, are 
either overcome by their fears or their political preju- 
dices, to make admissions, or to rclinquisli great 
rights, not understanding that they are rivetting the 
shackles of despotism. Others neither as good, nor 
so sensible, but who understand perfectly why the 
silversmiths of Demetrius were so furious against 
Paul, stand ready to endorse every outrage, and 
justify every wrong, however gross it may be. But 
neither of these classes will be able to shut out from 
the great mass the fundamental truth, that our Con- 
stitution Avas a mutual recognition of right amongst 
equals, standing upon a common platform, and co- 
operating and consulting together, not in the forma- 
tion of a despotism, but of a free government, with all 
the guards that freedom demands. They know that 
in that government these great rights involving the 
interests of life, liberty and property, were hedged in 
with all that jealous care, which a love of liberty sug- 



48 

gested, and they can therefore understand how its 
framers woukl have shrunk back from the idea that 
they were conferring power in the Constitution, upon 
the Executive of their new Government, so as to 
enable him at his sovereign will and pleasure, to 
encroach upon all these, much less strike them down 
at a blow. 

That quotation of Cicero in the forefront of this 
Address, has a marked significancy and importance 
for these times. "/I greater inheritance comes to us 
from ovr rights and Imvs than from our parents.''^ How 
beautiful the sentiment ! and how important that 
every man worthy of the name of freeman should lay 
it to heart, when both the integrity of his rights, and 
the laws by which they were supposed to be secured, 
are threatened. The citizen who values not this dear 
bought inheritance as inestimable, as worth more than 
lands or gold at an hour like this, may in the future 
be compelled to exclaim, with bitterness of spirit and 
unavailing sorrows, in that reproachful language of 
the Romish breviary: 

•' Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa." 

It will be to me a source of satisfaction to my dying 
day, that I have from the first up to this hour, 'mid 
obloquy and persecution, protested most solemnly in 
all places and at all times, through good report and 
through evil, against the spirit of absolutism, that 
has been threatening to overthrow the dearest most 
cherished rights of freemen. There was no pretence 
for this bold invasion of those rights and of course 
there could be no justification. To have submitted 
in silence would have been the part of a craven — to 
have acquiesced without a murmur, would have proved 



49 

mc false to the toac'liinjj^s of a revolutionary ancestry. 
I feel tliankfiil tliat strength was vonclisafed me in 
the hour of trial, to take my position and keep it. It 
will l)c amongst tlie proudest recollections of my life, 
and I want no bettcu' tribute to my memory after I 
am gone. 

You all are aware, perhaps, that \\c have not in 
our Constitution what is generally known as a Bill 
of Rights, as they exist in our State Constitutions. 
There M-ere many in the Convention who were 
anxious that it should be introduced, but it was 
thought best not to insert it. The reason given was, 
that if no Bill of Rights was inserted, then all rights 
and liberties not relinquished to the General Govern- 
ment in the Constitution, either in express terms, or 
by necessary implication, would be considered as re- 
tained by the people, and on the other hand, if a Bill 
of Rights was introduced into the Constitution and 
any right or liberty chanced to be omitted, it would 
be considered as relinquished to the General Govern- 
ment by implication. 

Now mark it — although no Bill of Rights so called, 
was introduced, the people afterwards insisted upon 
more guarantees, and all those Rights usually embraced 
in such an instrument were embodied in Amendments 
to the Constitution. All these Rights so embodied 
belong to the people absolutely. They are rights 
remember, not like the privilege of the writ of Habeas 
Corpus, to be suspended upon the happening of a 
certain exigency; but ah-soade, which neither the 
Executive or the Legislative Departments can sus- 
pend or take away. AMiatever may be the doctrine, 
as to where exists the correct Constitutional deposi- 



50 

tory of the right to suspend the privilege of this great 
writ, there cannot be a doubt in the mind of any man, 
that liere are guarantees of liberty absolutely beyond 
the reach of molestation or suspension, save only by 
that power which can change or destroy the organic 
act itself. And yet these have all been taken away 
by the fiat of the Executive, or of some member of 
his Cabinet. Men have been incarcerated in the 
casemates of the military fortresses of the country for 
months, who know not to this hour the charges alleged 
against them. A Roman pagan had a much better 
knowledge of the great principles of justice, than the 
President and the Executive officers of our Hepublic 
as we find them well embodied in those memorable 
words of Festus to Agrippa: '-'• For it seemeth to me 
unreasonahle to send a jyt'isoner, and not withal to sig- 
nify the crimes laid against himr 

I know that new theorists have arisen in these 
latter days — political philosophers, worthy of a 
diploma from the college of Laputa, who would 
inculcate the damnable heresy, that in times of great 
public danger, the legal maxim should prevail, '"'• solus 
popiili suprema lex.'''' But this maxim cannot apply 
here. Its true legal application is to a case in which 
private property is taken for some object of public 
utility. It does not apply to a case in which personal 
liberty has been restrained. An usurpation upon the 
fundamental constitutional rig-hts of the citizen can 
never be justified in times of great public danger. 
When the waves are running mountain high, and 
the ship is almost in a death grapple with the angry 
tempest, what would you think of the man who 
would advise the crew to unship the rudder, and 



51 

throw the compass and the cliait overboard. And 
yet tlie folly of snch advice is no ^n-eater than that 
given hv some of the thcorizcrs of onr day, who see 
no safety for the State, excei)t in the entire destruc- 
tion of the Constitution, and all that makes govern- 
ment valuable. 

I am fully aware, that, in ancient commonwealths, 
self-preservation was considered as a justification of 
" t}ic tcmporan/ vciUn(j of the Statittc-s' of Libert^.'' The 
dictator who in the hour of a Nation's peril, stept 
forth from the Roman Senate with absolute power 
over the life, liberty, and prospects of the Roman 
citizen was only the creation of this dangerous idea. 
But in this country, it was never intended at any 
time, to trust executive power, vested in a single 
magistrate " to keep the vigils of Liberty." In our 
revolutionary struggles, it was Corbin, who, when a 
proposition was made in the Virginia Legislature, 
during a most alarming crisis in the affairs of that 
Commonwealth to make his friend Patrick Henry 
dictator, silenced the proposition by the stern re[)ly, 
" Your dictatorial crown to his brow, my dagger to his 
heart.'" The defence of liberty under our system of 
Government can never rest in the Executive or 
become its peculiar duty. He can only be the 
instrument to accomplish a great end : but in doing 
it he can have no right to assume powers not con- 
ferred. It was Webster, in his great speech on 
Jackson's protest, who said: "Who is he that de- 
clares to us, through tlie President's lips, that the 
security for' freedom rests in Executive authority? 
Wlio is he that belies the blood, and libels the fame 
of his ancestry, by declaring that they have invoked 



52 

Executive power to come to the protection of 
liberty 1 Who is he that thus charges them with 
insanity or recklessness, of thus putting the lamb 
beneath the lion's paws '? No, sir, no, sir — our 
security onlij consists in our ivatchfulness of Executive 
potver.^^ 

Some men appear to me, as if they desired to make 
this Constitution of limited and defined powers an 
instrument to be construed so as to suit every whim 
of passion or of prejudice. They would make it 
mean every thing to suit the shifting changes of the 
hour. They remind me of the brothers with their 
father's will, in Swift's Tale of a Tub. 

The father of these lads died while they were 
young, and on his death bed calling them to him 
he said: 

Sons, because I have no estate, I have provided 
you each here a new coat. Now you are to under- 
stand that these coats have two virtues, and one is 
that with good wearing they will last you fresh and 
sound as long as you live ; the other is that they will 
grow in the same proportion with your bodies. You 
will find in my will full instructions about the 
wearing and management of these coats. I have also 
commanded in my will that you should live like 
brethren and friends in one house, for then you will 
surely thrive. Some time after the old gentleman's 
death, shoulder knots came in fashion, and all the 
men of ton were sporting them. The brothers were 
very anxious to find a clause in the will that should 
authorize them to use shoulder knots. They read 
the will carefully over, and not a word like shoulder 
knots could they find. After awhile one of the 



63 

brothors, who liai)()t'nc(l to bo moro book loarncd 
than the other two, said lit> liad found an oxpcdicnt. 
It is tnio, said lie. thon^ is uothini^^ hove in this will 
totlihin vcrhis^ in so many words, niakin*; nu'ntion of 
sliouUler knots, but I dare conjecture we may find 
them inchisive or totulem st/lhihif^^ in so many sylla- 
bles ; so they fell again to examine, but their evil 
star had so directed the matter that the iirst syllable 
was not to be found in all the writings of the will. 
Upon which disapi)ointnient another said, take heart 
brothers, there is yet hope, for if we cannot find it in 
so many syllables, or so many words, we can at least 
find it totldem Iitcri'<, in so many letters. This was 
commended, and they fell to again, and soon picked 
out enough letters in the will that put together spelt 
shoulder knots, except the letter k ; but this difficulty 
they soon settled by deciding that the ancient spelling 
of k was by a c. Upon this discovery all farther 
difficulty vanished, and they sported the shoulder 
knots about town. 

We incline to the opinion that this ingenious 
mode of construing the will is sometimes resorted to 
by some of our modern theorists in construing the 
Constitution, where by this method they are sure to 
find all the power they may want. 

I have now in a measure performed the duty so 
kindly assigned me by the Common Council, to write 
the history of the Compromises of the Constitution. 

We have seen to-night how, step by step, " here 
a little and there a little," was shaped and fashioned 
beneath the gently moulding hands of concession and 
compromise, the great fabric of our Constitution. 
It became a perfect whole only through that principle 



54 

which recognizes safety in concession. It was a 
compact, it is true ; but did you ever hear of a 
compact where mutual concessions and compound- 
ings were not necessary to fasten the whole. What 
is the marriage relation but a compact ; and what 
welds it together and strengthens it as long as they 
both shall live ; but this very yielding to each others' 
weaknesses, this adjustment by concession of their 
little difficulties. As Jeremy Taylor has said: 
" Pkitarch compares a new marriage to a vessel 
before the hoops were on, everything may dissolve 
the tender associations ; but when the joints are 
stiffened and tied by a firm compliance and propor- 
tionate bending, scarcely can it be dissolved without 
fire or the violence of iron." And think you if such 
yielding and bending are necessary to preserve 
harmony in one man's family, it can be of less 
importance in preserving the continued peace and 
harmony of a great nation "? Not so thought or acted 
the framers of our Constitution ; for they set us an 
example that, had we but closely followed, we should 
to this day have remained a happy and united people. 
There were no evil serpents of vain boasting, Phara- 
saical pride, and fanatical philanthropy hissing about 
its cradle ; or, if there were, our early patriotism, 
like Hercules, strangled them in its youthful grasp. 
The Constitution was, indeed, a stupendous work, 
when you consider the times in which it was framed. 
It unquestionably has its faults ; for what human 
work has not"? But considering the novelty of the 
questions involved, the magnitude of the principles 
at stake, the diverse hostile views of its members — 
the great wonder is, it should ever have been 



55 

coniplctod at nil. Every liistoriral student who has 
markod each strj) o( its ])ropTSs, is ahlc to compre- 
hend tlie rare truthfulness, force and beauty of those 
lines of Longfellow : 

" Wo know wliiit niastors made thy keel, 
What workiiK'M wrought tliy ril»s of steol, 
^Vhat anvils rang, wliat hammers beat; 
In what a forge, in what a heat, 
Were shaped tlic^e anchors of our hope." 

The men who framed this majestic work, compre- 
hended fully the greatness and grandeur of their 
mission ; and were determined to fidfil it, in a 
manner worthy of the Nation they represented and 
themselves. They were patriots from every section, 
not cavilling about signing away their prejudices for 
their duty, so that a mutual confidence mijjht be 
infused into the Nation. 

Seventy odd years have scarcely passed since this 
C^reat fiibric came fresh from the hands of its builders; 
and just when it really appeared to our limited 
vision, that God was forming amongst us, as it were, 
the grand amalgam of the Nations, as we fondly 
hoped, for some great purpose of his own — in a 
moment when many men looked not for it, and those 
who had predicted its coming, prayed that it might 
never happen, the fabric parts asunder, and we find 
ourselves standing face to face, with the most 
stupendous event in the world's history, " A great 
life," fsays the eloquent ISIercer, " girt with glory, 
this pledge of the fairest and holiest hopes, this 
America, this home of Freedom, is broken down by 
the axes and hammers of political madmen. North 
and South. This is a new thing even in the history 



53 

of States, and it is a shock to the moral framework 
of society." 

And still the terrible event like some fearful 
serpent, keeps unfolding its deadly coils. Every 
day and every hour reveal to us the sickening horrors 
that always haunt the bloody footsteps of civil strife. 
The trumpets are continually calling to the battle the 
men of one nation, brethren of one great National 
family, tiay, even to deadly encounter, the children 
who have been reared beneath the same roof tree, 
nourished at the same maternal breasts. I envy not 
the heart of that man who can rejoice and make 
merry over the fearful slaughter that such unnatural 
conflicts provoke. I envy not the hereafter of that 
Christian minister, who can make such slaughter the 
occasion for ribald exultation from the sacred desk. 
I cannot divest myself of the idea as I read of these 
victories, that I hear amid the clang of the strife, the 
voices of the patriot dead, the tones of fearful 
warning, bidding us stay this unnatural struggle, and 
pleading with us, not to give the noble heritage they 
left us to reproach. I read the bloody tale of these 
victories, but Spenser's fearful lines are ringing in 
my ears : 

"Rome, now of Rome shall be the only funeral, 
And only Rome, of Rome have victory." 

I read the sickening tale of slaughter, with only 
such feelings as those that animated the bosom of the 
Spanish maiden in the Ballad : 

'' Nearer comes the storm, and nearer, rolling fast and frightful on, 
Speak, Ximenes! Speak and tell us, who hath lost, and who hath won? 
Alas ! Alas ! I know not: friend and foe together fall. 
O'er the dying rush the living — pray my sister, for them all." 



57 

Would to (joil my friends, tli;it {]\c '^vvu\ men wlio 
in such unsclfislinoss, and uitli so mucli wisdom, laid 
the foundations of tlio fahric of our Union, could 
have been spared to us, that they niii;ht have awed 
by their majestic presence, the insidious designs of 
Northern abolition fanaticism, and its legitimate off- 
spring, Southern secessionism. The one was just as 
legitimately the fruit of the other, as jealousies and 
heart-burnings are the fruit of rank injustice and 
misrepresentation, both, in the language of our 
"Washington, " tending to render alien to eacli other 
those who ought to be bound toj^ethcr bv the ties of 
fraternal affection." When I contemplate the men 
of our early era, I cannot but feel, " that there were 
giants in those days." "When I compare their im- 
mense mental grasp, their lierculean labors, their 
god-like patriotism, their prudent forecast, with the 
mental imbecility, pigniy efforts, mad fanaticism, and 
short-sighted scheming of the public men of this day 
and generation, I am struck with the contrast, and 
feel some apprehensions for the future. Who can 
read the sickening story of the Investigating Com- 
mittees of Congress, without a thrill of horror in 
every vein '? Men, in high places, prostituting their 
offices, to batten upon the spoils torn from the Trea- 
sury of a Nation in a death grapple with rebellion ! 
Human vampires sucking blood from the country's 
veins, while with the gently ftmning wings of honied 
words, and patriotic professions, they lulled their 
victim into unconsciousness of their designs ! 

But in the midst of all the woes that environ us, I 
have still a lingering hope that the time will yet 
come, when the stern teachings of the hour, shall 



58 

curb this disregard of honesty in high places, and ex- 
pose to merited scorn and punishment, those who 
have been so forgetful of themselves and their coun- 
try. Let us indulge the hope, also, that a wise and 
prudent statemanship may yet control the minds of 
those in power in re-uniting the States now separated 
from us, and not allow passion and fanaticism, to 
guide and control them, in their responsible work. 
How the last is to be accomplished, or when, is in the 
hands of Him who can bring order out of confusion. 

Let us all then have faith at least, that the hour 
may come, when we shall see the bow of hope and 
promise spanning the storm-cloud of civil war, pro- 
claiming to us, and to our remotest posterity, that 
God will never more smite our land with such a flood 
of woe as is now upon us. When it does cease, 
however, the Ark of our liberties must be found 
safe anchored upon the Ararat of the Constitution, 
or else the dove that shall be sent forth will not re- 
turn with the olive branch in her beak, to tell us that 
the storm is over. 

Let us have an abiding faith that God will give us 
back once more that Union which our Fathers loved ; 
an Union springing from truth, virtue and patriotism, 
fair on its form, with an outstretched arm to raise 
the feeble and protect the weak, dispensing equal 
political justice to every section, and imposing equal 
burdens upon all. The Union under the Constitu- 
tion. The Union that, sustained by Northern and 
Southern patriotism, has borne the Stars and Stripes 
triumphant over land and over sea. No Utopia 
fashioned by the maudlin brains of sickly fenaticism, 
but an Union, that by its justice and moderation 



50 

sliall win back for us, tlio alienated affertion of tliosc 
now estranged, securin<^ for tlie fiitiue, permanent 
domestic tran([uillity, and equal and exact justice for 
all, while holdinji; up as enemies of their race and of 
mankind, those who dare denounce it as a " league 
with Death and a Covenant with hell." 

Then, and only then, will the time return, when 
North and South can stand once more by the altar of a 
common nationality, beneath the protecting shadows 
of that flag, whose clustering stars shall again em- 
blemize a united people. 

In the great Temple of our Freedom, in which 
American freemen resort to pay their devotion to the 
divinity of their country, there is no separate statue 
to the Union, but in the midst and around its great 
altar, stands the statues of the several States, as they 
came one by one to build up and give vitality to the 
Union. In the midst stands the great majestic 
statue of the Constitution, having inscribed upon 
its breast in letters more brilliant than gold, " The 
Unions Destroy the Constitution and its heart, 
which is the Union, must cease to beat. 

Fellow citizens ! if you would preserve the Union 
for which the Revolution was fought, the Union that 
Washington cherished, that Jefferson, Madison and 
Jackson sought to secure, the Union I have been 
taught to love and reverence — the harp of National 
freedom must be turned to harmony at the Capitol. 
It must strike no discordant notes, but its vibrations 
must find a sympathetic response in every State of 
this Confederacy. The very life of the Union has 
ever been in the hearts of the American people. 
You must win back those hearts if you expect to 



60 

restore and to perpetuate it. It must be, as Bishop 
Doane so well expresses it, " one broad blessed Union, 
the Union of our homes and our hearts, indomitable, 
impregnable, imperishable." That man who looks 
for the old Union to arise, beautified and glorified, 
from the yet warm ashes of desolated Southern 
homes, from the blood of kindred shed in civil strife, 
from the fierce hate that the dying shall breathe 
forth as a perpetual legacy to those who siu'vive 
them, most surely imagines a vain thing. " The 
glorious baldric blazoned with the Stars and Stripes," 
may wave in triumph over every foot of Southern 
territory, but if it waves over a subjugated, intimi- 
dated and impoverished people, it will be the banner 
of conquest, and not of the Union that our Fathers 
loved and sacrificed so much to secure. Such a 
Union as this, can have no attractive cohesive force, 
or if it has, it only will be " when the sun shall go 
back on the dial of Ahaz ;" 

" When Earth's cities have no sound or tread, 
And ships are drifting to the dead, 
To shores where all is dumb." 



«>> 



^\ '^^^^^^ :^^''<' ^^^<f ^^^M:^ \ ^"^ •*^^^''° ' 



^*- "^^ 1^'^ ^iwV/*;'' ^ 








' • o . 






W£RT 
BOOK8IN01NC 



